Trade Bradley?
by philkid3 on May 5, 2008 6:55 PM CDT
Email
PrintThis stems from another thread, and I was sort've amazed by some responses, so I started a poll. This is, assuming, of course, someone wants to trade and we get a good offer in return. This is a "what if" question.
We're not going to compete this year without a lot of luck. We are not currently a very good team, and the Rangers should not be trying to Win Now because it's just way too much of a stretch. They need to be planning for the future.
Milton Bradley is 30. He is probably not going to be a part of that future.
He's a Free Agent at the end of the season.
He's got an OPS+ of 150, but for his career he's 111. His relative value is pretty high right now. Just like Gagne, he's performing somewhat over his head right now (not that we could get a trade this early in the season, but that's beside the point).
This all assumes we get trade offers and they're worth taking, of course, but I don't see any reason for the Rangers not to trade him if they get the chance. He's been great, awesome. If we lose him, we will be worse, but it's not like we're a playoff team with Milton Bradley. I don't understand trying to avoid being terrible at present at the expense of the future if you're not good enough for it to matter.
65 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
i think hes more valuable later on in the season
but if we can get a good arm/bat for him im all for it…
Every loss is one step closer to the top of the 2009 draft!
The longer he hits like this, the more valuable he is.
If his OPS+ is still 150+ in July, he’s that much more valuable.
But the risk is that he’ll regress towards the mean before then and lose a lot of value.
The way he is playing
I would say so.
Now that I say that, I realize that I don’t even know how that is determined. Who decides that sort of thing and what exactly is taken into account? Somebody fill me in.
Remember
They classify players based on 3 years’ worth of production. Between ‘06 and 7, he missed out on pretty much a full season’s worth of games.
Well
he was a type A this last off season, so I’d say there’s a pretty damn good chance he’d be a type A this coming off season.
They pro-rate performance for time missed, so he’s basically a lock.
"If we where [sic] gonna trade them Salty, I would want a helluva lot more than just Joba though." -lonestarJon
The Pads didn't offer him arbitration
so we’re safe.
"If we where [sic] gonna trade them Salty, I would want a helluva lot more than just Joba though." -lonestarJon
by thedirkatron on May 5, 2008 11:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Bradley
If a good package is offered I think you have to take it. Not only is Bradley currently playing really really well which he probably can’t sustain throughout the year but his injury history makes waiting for the trade deadline a risky move.
But he should not be traded for an inferior package because of his injury history. If a team tries to lowball us I think it is worth the risk to keep him awhile and pray he stays healthy.
But if he does stay healthy, what do we get?
A good player who’s a free agent at the end of the year playing on a team that’s not going anywhere.
I’d like them to take the best offer they can if the offer comes.
Well
If he is healthy and continues producing I think he could net a haul similar to Gagne.
I would say if a team calls tomorrow and offers two AA high ceiling prospects you trade him. But if say they offer 2 low level prospects you wait. I think Bradley is worth at least two prospects of at least AA level. Possibly 1 AAA/ML ready and 1 A+. But 2 A ball players isn’t good enough right now. At the trade deadline those two A ball prospects could be the right move if another player is included
Oh, I understand what you're saying.
Yeah, this poll wasn’t meant to just be, or even at all be, “trade him now.” Just trade him, period.
It depends how good of a prospect
And what type of a prospect. If we are offered a great pitching prospect for him, then I’d reluctantly agree to that. But if we are offered a decent catching prospect or another position that we are doing fine at, I’d decline it. I would rather see Bradley locked up for a 2 year +3rd year team option deal.
I think myself
That if you’re offered a good prospect for Bradley, you take it irregardless, even if it’s another catcher or something. That way, you can turn around and deal that prospect if you wanted to, in a package for an even better prospect that suits your needs.
Bradley is probably not going to resign here anyway, because Ron Washington is probably not going to be managing this team in 2009 (at least I hope not). Bradley likes to win, and if Wash isn’t here, I don’t think he’d want to play here.
by LSJ on May 5, 2008 8:09 PM CDT up reply actions
Yep
Bradley is injury prone, isn’t the same fielder he once was, and is probably past his peak years. I know we don’t have any superstar OF prospects ready to go, but Boggs and Mayberry are very interesting, and Murphy has impressed. Besides, we can always trade for an outfielder later on if needed.
Bradley
I think the Rangers will have a tough decision to make with Bradley this summer.
Bradley is better than a 111 OPS hitter, his numbers are weighed down by his first few years. Seems that he would project to be around 115-135 over the next three years. The problem would be projecting his health. That’s impossible. Signing him would be risky, but I would be on board with something like 2yr/22MIL with a vesting third year option. Not sure if he’d do that or wants to hit free agency. Also, despite the recent irrational exuberance over Murphy, Boggs, Mayberry, and Cruz, OF/DH is a huge weakness for the Rangers.
Plus, until Bradley can prove he can play everyday in the field, his trade value would be greatly diminished.
by Randy Richardson on May 5, 2008 8:22 PM CDT reply actions
+1
Many of you have bitched about our propensity to trade good players. Bradley has not given us any reason to trade him and until/if he does he should be on this team at least until someone, that is better, comes along.
That is not me in the photo, so relax.
That's a misunderstanding of baseball economics.
Who has bitched about trading good 30 year olds?
He has given us plenty of reason to trade him. He is playing very well, has little chance of being a part of our future, is good trade bait and we’re not going anywhere this season.
Wh does he have little chance
of being part of our future?
If you’re talking about our future as in ‘15-’16, then, yah okay.
But Bradley is likely to still be a good hitter in ‘10 and ‘11.
"If we where [sic] gonna trade them Salty, I would want a helluva lot more than just Joba though." -lonestarJon
by thedirkatron on May 5, 2008 11:22 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't know about that.
First off, I think 2010 is optimistic. And he’s a free agent at the end of the season.
I really shudder at the idea of this franchise actually banking on a 30 year old injury-prone COF/DH with a lifetime 111 OPS+ being a part of the future 2+ years down the road. If they can’t get anything for him, whatever, but if that’s at the expense of even risky prospects, that’s a problem.
Most players start to decline after 30. He’s OPS+ed around 150 twice in his career, and he plays positions where you want better than that. His PECOTA projection for 2010 is a .285 EqA and a 2.0 WARP.
Ew.
If this team is banking on that being worth more to the team in the future than a decent prospect, I’m more sick of this franchise than I thought.
I'm not familiar with
the positions at which a team wouldn’t be happy with a 150 OPS+ player.
by Randy Richardson on May 5, 2008 11:38 PM CDT up reply actions
If he was consistently a 150 OPS+ player, I'd be happy with him at any position.
If he bounces between a 150 and a 110 or so, that’s a problem.
I think it's reasonable
to suggest he’ll be somewhere between 115-135. That’s better than any of the COF options we have now.
by Randy Richardson on May 5, 2008 11:58 PM CDT up reply actions
+1
Other than Hambone, how many players do we have on the roster who have a realistic shot at posting .300/.400/.500 seasons in ‘09-’10?
"If we where [sic] gonna trade them Salty, I would want a helluva lot more than just Joba though." -lonestarJon
by thedirkatron on May 6, 2008 12:02 AM CDT up reply actions
This season?
No doubt, I definitely agree. But I’m not worried about how good we are this season. Or next season, really.
By 2011, though, which is about the time I start to care about, I’ll bet we have someone worth at least 7.8 runs above replacement (his PECOTA projection).
I have no reason to expect him to significantly outperform that.
well, a team
needs 3 guys for COF/DH spots. I think he could be a solid option. I don’t think the worry would be decline, but staying healthy enough to regularly be in the lineup.
by Randy Richardson on May 6, 2008 12:21 AM CDT up reply actions
I think it's both.
I’ll be amazed if he doesn’t decline. If we need a COF and we’re prepared to compete in 2010, I don’t think it would be hard to find a .280 or so EqA free agent.
He's a very good defensive COF
and he’s the kind of player I can see aging relatively well with the bat.
I know players start to decline at 30, but it’s not a total crash, and every player is different.
I don’t think it’s a stretch at all to say Milton Bradley will be an effective hitter at age 32.
"If we where [sic] gonna trade them Salty, I would want a helluva lot more than just Joba though." -lonestarJon
by thedirkatron on May 5, 2008 11:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Bradley
he just turned 30, he’s 2yrs 3 months older than Cruz and Botts. I realize he’s past the recognized hitters prime, but you can’t assume decline. He has an 85 point differential between his career BA and OBP, so even if his average declines his OBP should be respectable. He doesn’t rely on HRs for his slugging percentage, so you’re unlikely to see a big SLG decline if he were to have a low HR year.
by Randy Richardson on May 6, 2008 12:19 AM CDT up reply actions
Well
He’s a high average guy with good patience, good bat control and good gap power, which tend to be skills that don’t erode that quickly, plus he’s a good athlete, which helps the aging process.
And he was a very good defensive COF last year before his knee injury. Me saying he’s still a good one presumes his knee heals up fully and allows him to be a decent runner again. He has good range, seems to get good jumps and reads, and has a decent enough arm. I see no reason he can’t be a good defensive RF for a little while longer.
"If we where [sic] gonna trade them Salty, I would want a helluva lot more than just Joba though." -lonestarJon
by thedirkatron on May 6, 2008 12:20 AM CDT up reply actions
Ditto all that
He’ll continue to draw walks and hit well. My only worry is that if injuries make him fall off a performance cliff. If that injury risk keeps teams from offering much for him, keep him around and offer an incentive contract.
...and curse Sir Walter Raleigh, he was such a stupid git.
His most similar players did suffer a decline in the coming years, though.
Certainly he could break the mold, but I usually expect players to do what their most similar comparisons have done, not something else.
And do you mean he was good before the season ending injury defensively last year? Because I don’t see it. His defense isn’t a hang up to me, it’s not awful, but I definitely don’t see it as a plus at this point.
Most of all, though, I don’t expect him to be healthy and I don’t think this team is close enough to competing that they should be hanging on to 30 year olds if trade offers are coming.
Who are his most similar comps?
I assume you’re talking about Pecota (I don’t have a sub to BP), cause his most similar comps on baseball reference are retarded. I don’t even know how they came up with them.
Gabe Kapler and Kevin Mench?
Bradley’s stats are nowhere near similar to either of those guys. Bradley is a guy who’s put up good rates in his mid-to-late 20’s, but has seen his overall counting stats suffer due to injuries, whereas Kapler and Mench are guys who’ve put up horrible all around numbers in all facets of the game in their mid-to-late late 20’s due to sucking at baseball.
"If we where [sic] gonna trade them Salty, I would want a helluva lot more than just Joba though." -lonestarJon
Also, I don't see how he's a very good defensive COF.
He was pretty good once, now he’s average at best.
He's played 468 G's in CF?
Including CF time with Oakland as recently as last year.
Move him to a corner—and that range is plus, let alone a better-than-average arm, imo. Then consider the fact that some suitor could put him in CF with a 150 OPS+.
That is a shit ton of value that you are neglecting.
"I hope it's a special dumb person hell so that I don’t have to meet up with you after I die."
- The D-tron
by inactive lsb user on May 6, 2008 2:28 PM CDT up reply actions
Ok?
And your eyeballs tell you that he’s “average at best.”?
"I hope it's a special dumb person hell so that I don’t have to meet up with you after I die."
- The D-tron
by inactive lsb user on May 7, 2008 12:05 AM CDT up reply actions
Yup
1.3 fielding Win Shares last season. 1.9 the year before.
THT rates his arm as nothing special.
.891 RZR with 15 OOZ in SD RF in 2007. He did have a .906 and 37 OOZ in 2006, but considering the injury and the fact that he didn’t approach that last year or this year so far, I don’t think he’s a plus fielder anymore.
He was one Fielding Run Above Average in 2007, and 5 below in 2006.
None of this looks like anything better than about average. An average fielder is a good thing, but I’m not seeing Bradley’s fielding being some sort of plus.
Bradley...
I think is a very good offensive player and still above average defensive player. I just don’t think he can stay healthy and that’s why I perfer the Rangers deal him and get some prospects back.
If I knew he would stay healthy for 3 years I would give him 30 mil for those 3 years without thinking twice about it. It’s all health concerns imo.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
If I knew he'd stay healthy, I'd want them to consider him giving him something long term, as well.
I’d first want them to see what they could get for him this year, though. If some team would give up a really nice prospect, he’d still be worth trading.
Bradley
“If I knew he’d stay healthy, I’d want them to consider him giving him something long term, as well.”
What about the huge decline you were predicting?
by Randy Richardson on May 7, 2008 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions
He'll be an effective hitter
in the 300 or so ABs he has.
Milton is the prototype for the guy you buy low and sell high on if you are smart.
"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck
+1
You make a lot of good points there, especially about everyone getting their man parts all atwitter about Boggs, Mayberry and the hAAAAmmer.
Bradley has always been a good hitter, and we need very good hitters on this team, now and going forward. It’s not like he’s ancient or anything, so it’s certainly feasible that he could be part of the ‘10-??? teams we’re all looking forward to. And he hasn’t brought the crazy yet this year, so that’s nice.
I’d hold off on looking to deal him now.
Of course if someone wants to blow me away…. but that goes without saying.
"If we where [sic] gonna trade them Salty, I would want a helluva lot more than just Joba though." -lonestarJon
by thedirkatron on May 5, 2008 10:05 PM CDT up reply actions
You deal him...
with his injury history and the fact that he may be our best trade chip (unless we deal Millwood or Padilla) you have to deal Board Game. If not he walks as a FA at the end of the year, especially if he stays healthy this year and puts up good #’s. Someone will give him 3 years and $30 next year and that’s to risky with his injury history imo.
The other reason is now we have Hamslam, Murphy, Boggs, and maybe even JMJ and Cruz in the OF for the second half of the season. IMO Cat, Byrd, and Board Game need to be dealt for the best prospects that the Rangers can get.
"The only good is knowledge and the only evil is ignorance."-Socrates
Value of a type A
thats 2 firsts in value, i can stand MB walking and taking the picks, meaning if we trade him we have to get that in value or its not worth it. if he isnt a type A you take what u can, but if he is, i expect at least the gagne return and if he’s performing like until now, i expect more,
.500 or bust!
Bad Vibes Kill Rallies!
"Well, we are one of the cheapest teams in Major League Baseball"
-Tom Hicks 4/8/2008
I think that
you always prefer the legit prospect over a draft pick. For one, your risk of failure is much lower. For two, you save a good deal of money on signing bonus and development costs.
Found this funny....
Seems like the Cubs fans at MLBTR are dreaming their wild dreams again….
“I primarily had two ideas in mind. The Athletics with Joe Blanton and the Blue Jays with A.J. Burnett. The A’s with something like a Joe Blanton and Jack Cust for Hill, Colvin, Marshall and Murton or Burnett and Matt Stairs for a similar package. Obviously these teams would need to fall out of contention first though.
And maybe something really wild like Kevin Millwood and Milton Bradley for Hill, Colvin, Gallagher, Murton, and Marshall.”
irregardless
is not a word, but i do think that any solid prospect we could get back for Bradley is a positive. That is why we bring veterans here right now, to flip them.
What worries me, though. . .
. . . is that the Rangers bring in veterans because they actually think they can compete right now. Or, worse, they know they can’t compete, but want to win as many games as possible, anyway, and thus have no interest in trading veterans.
That’s the sort of logic that kills fanchises.
Veterans
What veterans that we brought in are blocking young players? Jennings wasn’t blocking anyone. Hurley wasn’t ready and Mendoza was considered almost ready but could use more time in the minors. Bradley? Nope. Guardado? Possibly but I don’t think we have anybody in the minors that is ready to be a late inning setup man. Broussard? Not even going to get into that.
In reality we didn’t have but 1 young player who had to start the season at a level they shouldn’t have been at. That was Salty. And he was blocked by a veteran who has been here awhile so its not like we brought in a guy to keep him down. We simply didn’t and still don’t have young players who are ready to play in the bigs yet. They are getting closer with each passing day. But they weren’t ready.
So since none of our young guys were ready we had to sign stopgaps. Tell me which veterans did we sign to long term deals this winter? None. They were all one year deals. Some of them involved risk/reward situations where we were gambling on them returning to form following an injury. I see no problem with this as long as we are not blocking young players from playing once they are ready. Now you may point to Boggs and Duran but realize that before the seaosn they had a combined ZERO games above AA. As well as they have done since coming up there was no way you could go into the season counting on those guys and risk their long term development by throwing them into the fire.
Jennings, Bradley, Guardado, BenBruiseHard blocking
Jennings blocked Gallaraga who was DFA’d or traded or whatever and doing well in detriot. Bradley i see as a good pickup but you can argue that cruz is destroying the minors and deserved a “shit or get off the pot” chance. Eddy, well A.J. and a multitude of other kids on his level we gotta find out about or risk losing over time. we all know how the BB thing worked out and who he blocked.
im not saying id go into a season like that but, to say those guys arent or werent blocking younger players….
not true.
.500 or bust!
Bad Vibes Kill Rallies!
"Well, we are one of the cheapest teams in Major League Baseball"
-Tom Hicks 4/8/2008
Personally,
I have no problem saying Cruz got his “shit or get off the pot” chance last year. I think folks would have been thrilled if Botts had got 300 ABs this year. I also don’t have much problem with Guardado, given how weak our bullpen has looked while he has been on the DL.
I had problems with Ben, because for the life of me I don’t see what he does, that current roster clogger Cat can’t do, and I didn’t understand Jennings, maybe because I saw the fat, gutless wonder pitch for the Astros last year.
"Before I leave, I once again condemn the despicable buffoonery of D.J. Cahill." - Huck
"What veterans that we brought in are blocking young players?"
Whether there are or not, that wasn’t my point.
I have no problem with them signing veterans. I would worry about them refusing to flip the veterans they sign.
Example
What veterans has JD brought in that he refused to flip if he was bocking a younger player? The only one that comes close is Sosa but he tried to trade him ad when that didn’t happen they benched him even though he was one of, if not the, most productive players on the team last year.
So far he has flipped veterans.
When did I complain that he hasn’t?
It’s something that would worry me. It’s not something that I’ve already seen as a problem and I don’t think I said I have.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Lone Star Ball
Related FanShots on Lone Star Ball
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- Baltimore’s tradition of fans shouting ‘O!’ during national anthem sparks interleague feud
- Chris Perez follows rant against Cleveland fans with even better rant against Cleveland fans
- Pitcher Clayton Richard gets key pinch single in 13th after coming in 0 for 16
- Livan Hernandez welcomes ball boy to the bigs with shower of sunflower seeds (VIDEO)
- Man beaten by four others in Dodger Stadium parking lot
